Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Some Plays Count: Gallo & Lee

In the Knicks win against the Hornets, Danilo Gallinari & David Lee had some nice chemistry going. The pair hooked up 3 times for easy buckets, and to the naked eye they appeared to be veterans that had played together for years. Although Gallo had an off-night with regards to shooting (2-9, pts) he racked up 5 assists, and helped the team’s spacing on the floor.

The below video shows the three plays in which Gallo fed Lee. In the first, Gallo’s hot outside shooting allows him to head fake his defender on the perimeter. He drives to the hoop, and draws the defense in. Lee had continued all the way to the hoop, and received a nice pass from the Rooster. In the second, Lee sets a beautiful pick, and Gallo rewards him with a fantastic bounce pass for an easy layup. The last play shows Gallo’s vision, as he leads Lee with a pass over the middle.

12 comments on “Some Plays Count: Gallo & Lee

  1. ess-dog

    Love the ‘Some Plays Count’ series, Mike. This is also bringing me back from the edge a bit. Yes, we at least have 2 guys that can play the game properly.
    Two’s a pretty low number – but it’s a start.

  2. ess-dog

    More proof that Harrington needs to sit/go: only one player has an assist to turnover ratio under 1.00 so far this year… yes, it’s Al, and he’s at .50. The next closest is Toney Douglas at 1.00 even in very limited rookie minutes.
    Addition by subtraction would work wonders in his case.

  3. GAx

    It kills me that we finally have a player who’s actually enthused to be on the team, but he’s kind of a drag on team efficiency and performance when he gets on the floor. Gallo is basically the only bright spot on this team that gets me to watch the games anymore.
    Everything else is just an uninspiring miasma of contract years and overwhelmed players who just can’t stack up against other teams without a legit star player of their own.

  4. Z

    “proof that Harrington needs to sit/go…addition by subtraction would work wonders in his case.”

    Ess– Harrington is (hopefully) not a part of the long-range plan, but I don’t think he is really the reason the team’s 1-4 start. In a perfect world he gets traded for someone who can shoot, pass, rebound, or any combination of the three, but would benching him really solve the Knicks problems? His 24 pts/game come at a high cost, but they are still points– something the Knicks are sorely in need of.

    Remember, Harrington was traded for a guy we all had the exact same complaints about. All things equal (i.e. contracts) I’d prefer having Jamal than Al, but Harrington is out there trying, and actually putting the ball through the basket when he drives– something the other Knicks aren’t doing too well.

    I argue in favor of addition by subtraction in many cases, but not here. His minutes still need to go to someone and it would probably be Jeffries. Or Hill, but something tells me you wouldn’t be too thrilled with that move for very long…

  5. ess-dog

    “I argue in favor of addition by subtraction in many cases, but not here. His minutes still need to go to someone and it would probably be Jeffries. Or Hill, but something tells me you wouldn’t be too thrilled with that move for very long…”

    Z, I hear you, but I believe that points are the easiest thing to make up. I honestly think without Harrington inefficiency, we would score roughly as much and give up less. Look at the Rockets. How will they ever survive without McGrady and Yao? But you could actually argue that they are just as good without them (Yao would help as he’s more efficient.)

    Jeffries happens to be the 2nd most inefficient player we have, so I’d hope his minutes would actually go to Hill or Darko or even Landry.

    I know that we just have to wait out the year with Al and the rest, and the Crawford trade was good because of that, but it’s really brutal watching Harrington is allz I’m sayin’.

  6. BigBlueAL

    Crawford has played very well so far coming off the bench for the Hawks. Looks like he will finally make the playoffs, good for him for even though he was an enigma for the Knicks he was really the only reason to watch the Knicks because at any moment he could explode and go on great runs and he did hit some game-winners. Plus he always looked like a good guy so I am happy for him that he will finally be in the playoffs.

  7. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Crawford’s TS% is 63.6%. and I doubt he’ll end the season above 55% (just over league average). He was at 57.1% TS% with the Knicks over 11 games, and finished at 54.5% for the year. That’s been his highest over a full season.

  8. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Sometimes I feel self conscious about the Some Plays Count video version. Like as if I’m not giving enough information or my video editing skills aren’t up to snuff (they aren’t – yet). But I just saw ESPN’s “Secrets of the Game: Pick & Roll” with Avery Johnson, and I can say I’ll sleep well tonight.

  9. Nick C.

    Neat stuff, once again. I am waiting for the counterpoint video now of Al, head down into 3 defenders. :-)

  10. Jafa

    Mike,

    You do a great job with the videos and I appreciate the way you breakdown plays to show what the knicks are doing and why it is working (or not working). One of the many reasons I keep coming back to this site.

    In other news, I read on ESPN that Iverson is unhappy with his reserve role (again) in Memphis. If this turns really bad, could we trade Jeffries for Iverson? Would the contacts match? Other than the salary cap relief for 2010, would he fit into the system the Knicks employ?

  11. latke

    Iverson has played two games. Mike Conley continues to be a mediocre point guard. Whether or not Iverson replaces him in the lineup, I think Iverson will get his 32 or so mpg, and that will shush him. Now, if the Grizzlies continue to lose (and the “this season ain’t happening” record is probably like 5 and 20) that will likely keep Iverson whining for a starting spot, whether or not he gets his minutes, and if this happens, I could see the Grizzlies looking to move him, but at the same time, if their attendance is up from AI, then I don’t see it happening, because it seems to me that’s the real reason they signed him. Anyway, even if they move him, they have no reason to pick up Jeffries (and the salaries don’t match — AI @ $3 million, Jeffries @ $6.5 mill). They’d probably rather just buy AI out and sign a filler player. You might be able to swing an AI for Nate deal, I guess.

Comments are closed.